-
The Lancet. Psychiatry Nov 2023Side-effects of psychiatric medication impair quality of life and functioning. Furthermore, they contribute to morbidity, mortality, stigma, and poor treatment...
BACKGROUND
Side-effects of psychiatric medication impair quality of life and functioning. Furthermore, they contribute to morbidity, mortality, stigma, and poor treatment concordance resulting in relapse of psychiatric illness. Guidelines recommend discussing side-effects with patients when making treatment decisions, but a synthesis of antidepressant and antipsychotic side-effects to guide this process is missing, and considering all side-effects is a complex, multidimensional process. We aimed to create comprehensive databases of antipsychotic and antidepressant side-effects, and a digital tool to support database navigation.
METHODS
To create the databases, we did an umbrella review of Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE from database inception to June 26, 2023. We included meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials examining antipsychotic monotherapy in the treatment of schizophrenia or antidepressant monotherapy in the treatment of major depressive disorder. We included meta-analyses in adults (aged ≥18 years) that assessed drugs with a common comparator. The search was complemented by a review of national and international guidelines and consensus statements for the treatment of major depressive disorder and schizophrenia in adults. Effect sizes for antipsychotic and antidepressant side-effects were extracted from meta-analyses examining the largest number of drugs. In cases of incomplete meta-analytic coverage, data were imputed on the basis of guideline-derived ordinal rankings or, if imputation was not possible, ordinal scores were extracted. Both meta-analytic and ordinal outcomes were normalised to provide values between 0 and 1. We then constructed a digital tool, the Psymatik Treatment Optimizer, to combine the side-effect databases with side-effect concerns of an individual user, to enable users to select side-effects of concern and the relative degree of concern for each side-effect. Concern weightings and the side-effect databases are synthesised via a multicriteria decision analysis method (technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal situation, or TOPSIS).
FINDINGS
Of 3724 citations, 14 articles containing 68 meta-analyses of individual side-effects met inclusion criteria. After review of 19 guidelines, seven provided ordinal data. Antipsychotic data were extracted from five studies (11 meta-analyses, n=65 594 patients) and four guidelines, and antidepressant data were extracted from three guidelines. The resultant databases included data on 32 antipsychotics (14 side-effects) and 37 antidepressants (nine side-effects). The databases highlighted the clinical dilemma associated with balancing side-effects, with avoidance of one side-effect (eg, weight gain for antipsychotics) increasing the risk of others (eg, akathisia). To aid with this dilemma, the Psymatik Treatment Optimizer synthesises the side-effect databases with individual user-defined concern weights. After computing up to 5851 pairwise comparisons for antidepressants and 5142 pairwise comparisons for antipsychotics, Psymatik ranks treatments in order of preference for the individual user, with the output presented in a heatmap.
INTERPRETATION
By facilitating collaborative, personalised, and evidence-based prescribing decisions, the side-effect databases and digital application supports care delivery that is consistent with international regulatory guidance for the treatment of schizophrenia and depression, and it therefore has promise for informing psychiatric practice and improving outcomes.
FUNDING
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Maudsley Charity, Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Antipsychotic Agents; Depressive Disorder, Major; Quality of Life; Antidepressive Agents; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 37774723
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00262-6 -
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria (Sao... 2023To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, an electronic search was performed in PubMed and Embase through May 17, 2022. All study designs that assessed a minimum of 20 schizophrenia-spectrum patients and provided data on TRS prevalence or allowed its calculation were included. Estimates were produced using a random-effects model meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The TRS prevalence across 50 studies (n = 29,390) was 36.7% (95%CI 33.1-40.5, p < 0.0001). The prevalence ranged from 22% (95%CI 18.4-25.8) in first-episode to 39.5% (95%CI 32.2-47.0) in multiple-episode samples (Q = 18.27, p < 0.0001). Primary treatment resistance, defined as no response from the first episode, was 23.6% (95%CI 20.5-26.8) vs. 9.3% (95%CI 6.8-12.2) for later-onset/secondary (≥ 6 months after initial treatment response). Longer illness duration and recruitment from long-term hospitals or clozapine clinics were associated with higher prevalence estimates. In meta-regression analyses, older age and poor functioning predicted greater TRS. When including only studies with lower bias risk, the TRS prevalence was 28.4%.
CONCLUSION
Different study designs and recruitment strategies accounted for most of the observed heterogeneity in TRS prevalence rates. The results point to early-onset and later-onset TRS as two separate disease pathways requiring clinical attention.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Prevalence; Schizophrenia; Drug Resistance
PubMed: 37718484
DOI: 10.47626/1516-4446-2023-3126 -
JAMA Psychiatry Dec 2023Every third to sixth patient with medical diseases receives antidepressants, but regulatory trials typically exclude comorbid medical diseases. Meta-analyses of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Every third to sixth patient with medical diseases receives antidepressants, but regulatory trials typically exclude comorbid medical diseases. Meta-analyses of antidepressants have shown small to medium effect sizes, but generalizability to clinical settings is unclear, where medical comorbidity is highly prevalent.
OBJECTIVE
To perform an umbrella systematic review of the meta-analytic evidence and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of antidepressant use in populations with medical diseases and comorbid depression.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception until March 31, 2023, for systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for treatment or prevention of comorbid depression in any medical disease.
STUDY SELECTION
Meta-analyses of placebo- or active-controlled RCTs studying antidepressants for depression in individuals with medical diseases.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction and quality assessment using A Measurement Tool for the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2 and AMSTAR-Content) were performed by pairs of independent reviewers following PRISMA guidelines. When several meta-analyses studied the same medical disease, the largest meta-analysis was included. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled data on the primary outcome (efficacy), key secondary outcomes (acceptability and tolerability), and additional secondary outcomes (response and remission).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Antidepressant efficacy presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) and tolerability (discontinuation for adverse effects) and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) presented as risk ratios (RRs).
RESULTS
Of 6587 references, 176 systematic reviews were identified in 43 medical diseases. Altogether, 52 meta-analyses in 27 medical diseases were included in the evidence synthesis (mean [SD] AMSTAR-2 quality score, 9.3 [3.1], with a maximum possible of 16; mean [SD] AMSTAR-Content score, 2.4 [1.9], with a maximum possible of 9). Across medical diseases (23 meta-analyses), antidepressants improved depression vs placebo (SMD, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.30-0.54]; I2 = 76.5%), with the largest SMDs for myocardial infarction (SMD, 1.38 [95% CI, 0.82-1.93]), functional chest pain (SMD, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.08-1.67]), and coronary artery disease (SMD, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.32-1.33]) and the smallest for low back pain (SMD, 0.06 [95% CI, 0.17-0.39]) and traumatic brain injury (SMD, 0.08 [95% CI, -0.28 to 0.45]). Antidepressants showed worse acceptability (24 meta-analyses; RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.02-1.32]) and tolerability (18 meta-analyses; RR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.13-1.64]) compared with placebo. Antidepressants led to higher rates of response (8 meta-analyses; RR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.14-1.94]) and remission (6 meta-analyses; RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.25-1.61]) than placebo. Antidepressants more likely prevented depression than placebo (7 meta-analyses; RR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.33-0.53]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The results of this umbrella systematic review of meta-analyses found that antidepressants are effective and safe in treating and preventing depression in patients with comorbid medical disease. However, few large, high-quality RCTs exist in most medical diseases.
Topics: Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Comorbidity; Depression; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 37672261
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.2983 -
The British Journal of Psychiatry : the... Jul 2023Early-onset psychosis (EOP) refers to the development of a first episode of psychosis before 18 years of age. Individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Early-onset psychosis (EOP) refers to the development of a first episode of psychosis before 18 years of age. Individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) include adolescents and young adults, although most evidence has focused on adults. Negative symptoms are important prognostic indicators in psychosis. However, research focusing on children and adolescents is limited.
AIMS
To provide meta-analytical evidence and a comprehensive review of the status and advances in the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of negative symptoms in children and adolescents with EOP and at CHR-P.
METHOD
PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42022360925) from inception to 18 August 2022, in any language, to identify individual studies conducted in EOP/CHR-P children and adolescents (mean age <18 years) providing findings on negative symptoms. Findings were systematically appraised. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed on the prevalence of negative symptoms, carrying out sensitivity analyses, heterogeneity analyses, publication bias assessment and quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
Of 3289 articles, 133 were included ( = 6776 EOP, mean age 15.3 years (s.d. = 1.6), males = 56.1%; = 2138 CHR-P, mean age 16.1 years (s.d. = 1.0), males = 48.6%). There were negative symptoms in 60.8% (95% CI 46.4%-75.2%) of the children and adolescents with EOP and 79.6% (95% CI 66.3-92.9%) of those at CHR-P. Prevalence and severity of negative symptoms were associated with poor clinical, functional and intervention outcomes in both groups. Different interventions were piloted, with variable results requiring further replication.
CONCLUSIONS
Negative symptoms are common in children and adolescents at early stages of psychosis, particularly in those at CHR-P, and are associated with poor outcomes. Future intervention research is required so that evidence-based treatments will become available.
Topics: Male; Humans; Child; Psychotic Disorders; Prognosis
PubMed: 37194556
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2022.203 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Jun 2023We aimed to identify promising novel medications for child and adolescent mental health problems. We systematically searched https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and... (Review)
Review
The future of child and adolescent clinical psychopharmacology: A systematic review of phase 2, 3, or 4 randomized controlled trials of pharmacologic agents without regulatory approval or for unapproved indications.
We aimed to identify promising novel medications for child and adolescent mental health problems. We systematically searched https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ (from 01/01/2010-08/23/2022) for phase 2 or 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medications without regulatory approval in the US, Europe or Asia, including also RCTs of dietary interventions/probiotics. Additionally, we searched phase 4 RCTs of agents targeting unlicensed indications for children/adolescents with mental health disorders. We retrieved 234 ongoing or completed RCTs, including 26 (11%) with positive findings on ≥ 1 primary outcome, 43 (18%) with negative/unavailable results on every primary outcome, and 165 (70%) without publicly available statistical results. The only two compounds with evidence of significant effects that were replicated in ≥ 1 additional RCT without any negative RCTs were dasotraline for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and carbetocin for hyperphagia in Prader-Willi syndrome. Among other strategies, targeting specific symptom dimensions in samples stratified based on clinical characteristics or established biomarkers may increase chances of success in future development programmes.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Psychopharmacology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Prader-Willi Syndrome; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic
PubMed: 37001575
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105149 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Mar 2023No systematic review has estimated the consistency and the magnitude of the risk of developing bipolar disorder I-II (BD-I/II) in individuals at clinical high risk for... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
No systematic review has estimated the consistency and the magnitude of the risk of developing bipolar disorder I-II (BD-I/II) in individuals at clinical high risk for bipolar disorder (CHR-BD).
METHODS
PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched until April 2022 in this pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42022346515) PRISMA-compliant systematic review to identify longitudinal studies in individuals meeting pre-defined CHR-BD criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and results were systematically synthesized around CHR-BD criteria across follow-up periods and different subgroups.
RESULTS
Altogether, 13 studies were included reporting on nine prospective independent cohorts (n = 678 individuals at CHR-BD). The mean age of participants was 15.7 years (range 10.1-22.6 years), and 54.2 % were females. The most common CHR-BD subgroup was subthreshold mania (55.5 %), followed by BD-Not Otherwise Specified (BD-NOS: 33.3 %). Development of BD I/II ranged from 7.1 % to 23.4 % after 2 years. Development of BD-I ranged from 3.4 % at 4 years to 23 % at 8 years. Development of BD-II ranged from 10 % at 2 years to 63.8 % at 4 years. The risk of developing BD-I appeared highest in those meeting BD-NOS criteria (23 % at eight years). Predictors of development of BD were identified but remained mostly unreplicated. The quality of the included studies was moderate (NOS = 5.2 ± 1.1).
CONCLUSIONS
Emerging data from research studies point towards the promising utility of CHR-BD criteria. These studies may pave the way to the next generation of research, implementing detection, prognostication, and preventive interventions in individuals at CHR-BD identified and followed in clinical practice.
Topics: Female; Humans; Child; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Male; Bipolar Disorder; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 36657494
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.01.045 -
Asian Journal of Psychiatry Jan 2023To integrate all evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of both pharmacological and nonpharmacological augmentation interventions for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pharmacological and nonpharmacological augmentation treatments for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis with normalized entropy assessment.
OBJECTIVE
To integrate all evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of both pharmacological and nonpharmacological augmentation interventions for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS).
METHODS
Six major electronic databases were systematically searched for RCTs published until July 10, 2021. The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms, and the secondary outcomes were positive and negative symptoms and acceptability. We performed random-effects network meta-analysis. Normalized entropy was calculated to examine the uncertainty of treatment ranking.
RESULTS
We identified 35 RCTs (1472 patients with 23 active augmentation treatments) with a mean daily clozapine dose of 440.80 (91.27) mg for 1168.22 (710.28) days. Network meta-analysis of overall symptoms (reported as standardized mean difference; 95 % confidence interval) with consistent results indicated that mirtazapine (-4.41; -5.61, -3.21), electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) (-4.32; -5.43, -3.21), and memantine (-2.02; -3.14, -0.91) were ranked as the best three treatments. For positive symptoms, ECT (-5.18; -5.86, -4.49) was ranked the best with less uncertainty. For negative symptoms, memantine (-3.38; -4.50, -2.26), duloxetine (-3.27; -4.25, -2.29), and mirtazapine (-1.73; -2.71, -0.74) were ranked the best three treatments with less uncertainty. All antipsychotics, N-methyl d-aspartate receptor agonists, and antiepileptics were not associated with more efficacy than placebo. Compared to placebo, only amisulpride had statistically significant lower discontinuation rate (risk ratio: 0.21; 95 % CI: 0.05, 0.93).
CONCLUSION
Add-on mirtazapine, ECT, and memantine were the most efficacious augmentation options for CRS. Data on other important outcomes such as cognitive functioning or quality of life were rarely reported, making further large-scale, well-designed RCTs necessary. (PROSPERO number, CRD42021262197.).
Topics: Humans; Clozapine; Network Meta-Analysis; Entropy; Memantine; Mirtazapine; Antipsychotic Agents; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 36470132
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2022.103375 -
Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology &... Mar 2023Schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSD) represent one of the leading causes of disability worldwide and are usually underpinned by neurodevelopmental brain abnormalities... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSD) represent one of the leading causes of disability worldwide and are usually underpinned by neurodevelopmental brain abnormalities observed on a structural and functional level. Nuclear medicine imaging studies of cerebral blood flow (CBF) have already provided insights into the pathophysiology of these disorders. Recent developments in non-invasive MRI techniques such as arterial spin labeling (ASL) have allowed broader examination of CBF across SSD prompting us to conduct an updated literature review of MRI-based perfusion studies. In addition, we conducted a focused meta-analysis of whole brain studies to provide a complete picture of the literature on the topic.
METHODS
A systematic OVID search was performed in Embase, MEDLINEOvid, and PsycINFO. Studies eligible for inclusion in the review involved: 1) individuals with SSD, first-episode psychosis or clinical-high risk for psychosis, or; 2) had healthy controls for comparison; 3) involved MRI-based perfusion imaging methods; and 4) reported CBF findings. No time span was specified for the database queries (last search: 08/2022). Information related to participants, MRI techniques, CBF analyses, and results were systematically extracted. Whole-brain studies were then selected for the meta-analysis procedure. The methodological quality of each included studies was assessed.
RESULTS
For the systematic review, the initial Ovid search yielded 648 publications of which 42 articles were included, representing 3480 SSD patients and controls. The most consistent finding was that negative symptoms were linked to cortical fronto-limbic hypoperfusion while positive symptoms seemed to be associated with hyperperfusion, notably in subcortical structures. The meta-analysis integrated results from 13 whole-brain studies, across 426 patients and 401 controls, and confirmed the robustness of the hypoperfusion in the left superior and middle frontal gyri and right middle occipital gyrus while hyperperfusion was found in the left putamen.
CONCLUSION
This updated review of the literature supports the implication of hemodynamic correlates in the pathophysiology of psychosis symptoms and disorders. A more systematic exploration of brain perfusion could complete the search of a multimodal biomarker of SSD.
Topics: Humans; Schizophrenia; Cerebrovascular Circulation; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Psychotic Disorders; Spin Labels
PubMed: 36341843
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2022.110669 -
Molecular Psychiatry Jan 2023People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical...
The impact of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on physical health outcomes in people with mood disorders across the lifespan: An umbrella review of the evidence from randomised controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical health in this population.
METHODS
Umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on pharmacological/non-pharmacological interventions for physical health outcomes/intolerability-related discontinuation in mood disorders (any age).
RESULTS
Ninety-seven meta-analyses were included. Among youths, against placebo, in depression, antidepressants/antipsychotics had higher discontinuation rates; in bipolar depression, olanzapine+fluoxetine worsened total cholesterol (TC)/triglycerides/weight gain (WG) (large ES). In adults with bipolar disorder, olanzapine worsened HbA1c/TC/WG (moderate/large ES); asenapine increased fasting glucose (small ES); quetiapine/cariprazine/risperidone induced WG (small/moderate ES). In bipolar depression, lurasidone was metabolically neutral. In depression, psychological interventions improved physical health-related quality of life (PHQoL) (small ES), fasting glucose/HbA1c (medium/large ES); SSRIs improved fasting glucose/HbA1c, readmission for coronary disease, pain (small ES); quetiapine/aripiprazole/olanzapine induced WG (small to large ES). Exercise improved cardiorespiratory fitness (moderate ES). In the elderly, fluoxetine yielded more detrimental cardiovascular effects than sertraline/escitalopram (large ES); antidepressants were neutral on exercise tolerance and PHQoL. In mixed age groups, in bipolar disorder aripiprazole was metabolically neutral; in depression, SSRIs lowered blood pressure versus placebo and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (small ES); brexpiprazole augmentation caused WG and was less tolerated (small ES); exercise improved PHQoL (moderate ES).
CONCLUSIONS
Some interventions (psychological therapies, exercise and SSRIs) improve certain physical health outcomes in mood disorders, few are neutral, but various pharmacological interventions are associated with negative effects. Evidence from this umbrella review has limitations, should consider evidence from other disorders and should be integrated with recent evidence from individual RCTs, and observational evidence. Effective treatments with either beneficial or physically neutral profiles should be prioritized.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aged; Adolescent; Fluoxetine; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Aripiprazole; Longevity; Glycated Hemoglobin; Antipsychotic Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36138129
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-022-01770-w -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Nov 2022MONTELEONE, A.M., F. Pellegrino, G. Croatto, M. Carfagno, A. Hilbert, J. Treasure, T. Wade, C. Bulik, S. Zipfel, P. Hay, U. Schmidt, G. Castellini, A. Favaro, F.... (Review)
Review
MONTELEONE, A.M., F. Pellegrino, G. Croatto, M. Carfagno, A. Hilbert, J. Treasure, T. Wade, C. Bulik, S. Zipfel, P. Hay, U. Schmidt, G. Castellini, A. Favaro, F. Fernandez-Aranda, J. Il Shin, U. Voderholzer, V. Ricca, D. Moretti, D. Busatta, G. Abbate-Daga, F. Ciullini, G. Cascino, F. Monaco, C.U. Correll and M. Solmi. Treatment of Eating Disorders: a systematic meta-review of meta-analyses and network meta-analyses. NEUROSCI BIOBEHAV REV 21(1) XXX-XXX, 2022.- Treatment efficacy for eating disorders (EDs) is modest and guidelines differ. We summarized findings/quality of (network) meta-analyses (N)MA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in EDs. Systematic meta-review ((N)MA of RCTs, ED, active/inactive control), using (anorexia or bulimia or eating disorder) AND (meta-analy*) in PubMed/PsycINFO/Cochrane database up to December 15th, 2020. Standardized mean difference, odds/risk ratio vs control were summarized at end of treatment and follow-up. Interventions involving family (family-based therapy, FBT) outperformed active control in adults/adolescents with anorexia nervosa (AN), and in adolescents with bulimia nervosa (BN). In adults with BN, individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-ED had the broadest efficacy versus active control; also, antidepressants outperformed active. In mixed age groups with binge-eating disorder (BED), psychotherapy, and lisdexamfetamine outperformed active control. Antidepressants, stimulants outperformed placebo, despite lower acceptability, as did CBT-ED versus waitlist/no treatment. Family-based therapy is effective in AN and BN (adolescents). CBT-ED has the largest efficacy in BN (adults), followed by antidepressants, as well as psychotherapy in BED (mixed). Medications have short-term efficacy in BED (adults).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Binge-Eating Disorder; Bulimia; Bulimia Nervosa; Feeding and Eating Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Meta-Analysis as Topic
PubMed: 36084848
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104857